This writ petition challenged the rejection of an application for furlough leave. The court found the rejection ground unreasonable, set aside the order, and remanded the matter to the authority for reconsideration.
Order rejecting application for furlough leave set aside; matter remanded to authority for reconsideration within four weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE
CRI. WRIT PETITION NO. 1880 OF 2004
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of :
of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders : Court’s or Judge’s orders
and Registrar’s orders. :
Ms. Shaila R. Pandey, Advocate |
|---|
appointed for the petitioner. |
Mr. D.S. Mhaispurkar, A.P.P. for therespondent State. |
CORAM: R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR &P.V. KAKADE, JJ. |
DATED: 18TH FEBRUARY, 2005 |
P.C.: |
1. Heard. Perused the record. The |
ground on which the application for |
furlough leave has been rejected does |
not appear to be sound and reasonable |
one and, thereofre, cannot be sustained |
and hence the order rejecting the |
application for furlough leave is |
hereby set aside and the matter is |
remanded to the concerned authority to |
reconsider the said application in |
accordance with the provisions of law |
within a period of four weeks from |
today. |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the rejection of the application for furlough leave was based on a sound and reasonable ground.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
Respondent State
R.M.S. Khandeparkar
P.V. Kakade
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court